kellym40 film review

A powerful force is set in motion in ‘Unstoppable’

Rating 3.5/5

This film, based on actual events, suggests what happens when determination and experience are brought forward to solve a pending disaster. All of the elements – story, character, action, and cinematography – come together as director Tony Scott takes Mark Bomback’s script and spins a great story into an action flick that delivers some fine entertainment.

The story begins when an engineer (Ethan Suplee) mistakenly sets a train in motion. It happens when Frank Barnes (Denzel Washington) takes on a new guy, Will Colson (Chris Pine), on another train. We soon discover the two trains are on the same track. To add to the thrills, the unmanned train is carrying toxic chemicals and is headed towards a not so rural area. The person in charge of operations for the railroad, Connie Hooper (Rosario Dawson), is alerted of the situation and discusses with other personnel how to handle the situation. Meanwhile, an executive in the main office, Galvin, played by Kevin Dunn, is more concerned about the cost of losing the train than arriving at a solution that would be beneficial for everyone. After failed attempts at stopping the train (which was warned by Barnes from his 20 plus years of railroading experience that everyone fails to listen to), Hooper begins to take Barnes’ experience into play, despite the continued hesitations from Galvin. A new plan is made on how to slow the train down and it begins to work for a little bit. However, a new plan is made and Barnes and Colson spring to action as a final attempt to stop the train.

Scott uses masterful shots of the train speeding down the track as news choppers hover around providing coverage of the impending disaster. The high-speed velocity of the train adds to the action and builds up, as the train gets closer to the populated town. Character development is somewhat lacking in this film, but that doesn’t seem to really matter as the attention is focused on the actions Barnes and Colson and their actions on stopping the train. There are some character moments from the pair that dives into their lives and explains where they are at that particular time and place, and that only adds to caring what happens to them and whether or not they will succeed. Galvin is your typical greedy executive. Hooper is the character that seems to lean towards her own judgment or executive judgment rather than the experienced employee and soon changes her views. These characters, and the supporting cast, play their characters well enough to care about a few and add to the tension to dislike a few (like Galvin).

Unstoppable is a full throttle train ride of action, tension, a little suspense, and some humor thrown in to make this film an enjoyable film and delivers enough to keep you on the track.

 

 

 

kellym40 film review

From 1984 to 2016, the ‘Ghostbusters’ are back

Rating 2/5 Stars

More than 32 years ago, a film was released, penned by a couple of guys named Dan Aykroyd and Harold Ramis, and became a comedy classic. The film had the right amount of humor and story and the execution of those elements were blended well by the crafty Ivan Reitman (Ghostbusters II, Kindergarten Cop, Twins, Dave, Six Days Seven Nights – and a host of other memorable comedies and action-comedies).

Now, 32 years later Paul Feig and Katie Dippold pen a script and thus, Ghostbusters is remade. But somehow, Feig’s (Bridesmaids, The Heat, Spy) direction fails to do bring this adaptation up to par. I say adaptation because it is adapted from the script by Aykroyd and Ramis. That is one thing I liked about the film. It wasn’t just a rehash of the same story and characters with a couple of things changed here and there. It was a fresh take on the story with some big names in female comedy today like Melissa McCarthy, Kristen Wiig, and Kate McKinnon. Leslie Jones joins and rounds out the four Ghostbusters.

McCarthy and Wiig play former friends and paranormal enthusiasts who had a falling out after writing a book together, and get sucked in to chasing paranormal activity after witnessing a sighting of a ghost. They are joined by a nuclear engineer (McKinnon) and subway worker (Jones).

While the film had its moments, I believe much of the comedy present was there for comedy’s sake. It seemed to have a lot of gags and “funny” bits, too much for my taste. The ladies’ new receptionist (Chris Hemsworth) was one the funnier roles, but there I think much of his actions and dialogue seemed to be there to just for comedy’s sake and Hemsworth’s portrayal appeared to be a little forced at times. It did have a decent story that I did find it somewhat captivating, and the characters were varied with some entertainment value, but, overall, I think it was trying to hard to be funny and just didn’t work for me.

The original cast even had cameos, which still didn’t seem to save the film. Bill Murray played a debunker of myths and facts. Aykroyd portrayed cab driver. Ernie Hudson played Jones’ uncle who happened to own a funeral parlor where she got the hearse (a nod, if you will, to the original). Even Sigourney Weaver had a cameo.

The film just seemed to not have enough substance to keep me fully entertained for the just under two hour run time. However, the other members in the audience seemed to enjoy the film there was a lot of laughter. So, while the film may work for some, it just failed for me.

kellym40 film review, Uncategorized

‘Olympus’ sequel, ‘London Has Fallen,’ falls under its predecessor

Rating 2.5/5

Last July I reviewed ‘Olympus Has Fallen,’ which was released in 2013, in anticipation of the sequel that has just been released. Creighton Rothenberger and Katrin Benedikt who penned ‘Olympus,’ wrote this sequel with a new director, Babak Najafi. His previous directing credits are mostly short films. Together, they seemed to fail to deliver a tense action-drama from three years ago. Don’t get me wrong. The film did have some tense moments and it did deliver explosions, gunfire, and car chases, but did not seem to be any different than previously seen in most any other film in the genre.

The film sets up the players and introduces the antagonist Aamir Barkawi (Alon Aboutboul), an arms dealer who is a very bad man. Well, what arms dealer is a good man? Tragedy strikes Barkawi and his family and he then blames the United States, primarily President Benjamin Asher, portrayed once again by Aaron Eckhart. After the tragedy, it flashes forward two years later where we see Asher jogging with Secret Service Agent Mike Banning. Gerard Butler reprises his role as ex-special forces turned Secret Service Agent. There’s the usual banter between the two and they have picked up nicely from the events of ‘Olympus.’ Banning and his wife Leah (Radha Mitchell) are expecting a child. We also learn that Banning is considering his resignation.

An international incident (the death of London’s Prime Minister) then propels the story forward, which prompts the gathering of world leaders and the U. S. President to London for the funeral. The President and his staff have days to plan the trip to London, unknown to them the Prime Minister’s death was just a ploy to gather the world leaders. The day arrives and the leaders gather in London making. Moments later, the attacks begin. As the story unfolds, plot points are revealed and the audience learns of the plot as information is revealed to the U. S. and London officials. Morgan Freeman returns and now is Vice President, Secret Service Director Lynn Jacobs (Angela Bassett) returns, Robert Forster reprises his role as Gen. Edward Clegg, and returning Defense Secretary Ruth McMillan (Melissa Leo) rounds out the key players for the United States. However, they all seem to take a back seat to the action as Banning and Asher are at the forefront this time around. Charlotte Riley is introduced as MI-6 Operative Jacqueline Marshall, who helps Banning and works with the rest of MI-6 and others to uncover the threats from Barkawi.

Butler portrays his character with the same intensity as before. But it didn’t work as well this time around because, as stated, the driving action was similar to other films in the genre. Eckhart’s President Asher did get a little more action in this film as he was running and firing guns as opposed to just being tied up and pushed around, and was believable but just not anything special. The rest of the supporting cast, from the United States personnel or the London operatives were decent in their respective roles. Aboutboul was not real convincing as the antagonist Barkawi. The fault there, I think, was that it didn’t feel like the character was written with enough dimension. Even his son, Kamran Barkawi (Waleed Zuaiter) appeared as a carbon copy of most other terrorists in action films such as this one.

From the onset, one can see the opening attack was a well-coordinated attack. As with ‘Olympus,’ there might have been a couple of things that might make you scratch your head. For example, knowing where the world leaders would be at the exact moment of the planned attack might have been questionable. But again, like its predecessor, it follows the idea that this was a well-planned attack. But if it took Barkawi two years to plan this attack, he must not be as good as an antagonist. This film, while it had its moments, seemed to have missed the mark on creating a worthy sequel.

kellym40 film review

Action, Humor Deliver for Marvel’s ‘Anti-Hero’

Rating 4/5

Even though ‘Deadpool’ was released a few weeks ago, there is no time like the present to put into words my thoughts on the film. It’s been a while since my last post, so needless to say I have been busy and got sidetracked for a while. Anyhoo, on with the review.

This is the second superhero film I reviewed. The last one was Marvel’s ‘Ant-Man’ last summer. So, again, it’s been a while. See the review of that film below.

Ant-Man

As I mentioned before, I am not an avid comic book reader. I know some essentials, but not every little quirk or plot point of many superheroes. And honestly, I really knew nothing about the character Deadpool until the film and other overheard conversations of comic book readers.

The premise is Wade Wilson (Ryan Reynolds), a former Special Forces operative, is diagnosed with cancer and decides to undergo an experimental procedure from a supposed government agent known as Ajax (Ed Ekrein) in order to stay with the love of his life, Vanessa (Morena Baccarin). The procedure gives Wilson regenerative healing powers, disfigured and nearly left for dead. Wilson decides he can’t go back to her and lets her think he is dead. Thus, he goes on a killing spree, with the help from his friend Weasel (T. J. Miller), as he tracks down Ajax to hopefully restore himself to what he was before the procedure.

With a budget of $58 million, it has grossed more than $285 million in just three weeks, so obviously it getting a following. The character is one of Marvel’s comical characters who seems to make fun of himself and the fact that he’s in a comic book (or in this case a film). He’s been labeled as the “merc with a mouth.” The character likes to talk and make sarcastic quips and jokes at his opponents all the while shooting up bad guys and getting his own type of vigilante justice.

Deadpool seems to be far from a superhero, he’s an anit-hero. And I believe that’s what makes the character work in this film. He’s not a superhero and he knows it. He periodically breaking the fourth wall and talks to the camera (the audience), and continuously cracking jokes and being a smartass. Breaking the fourth wall, I feel, is similar to the “play within a play” convention in some theatrical stage productions. That convention I’ve always found humorous and it worked well in this film.

What also worked for me in the film was the story structure and how it creatively and efficiently went back and forth between present and past and wove it into an entertaining non-linear story. Wilson gave much voice over narration throughout the film, which added humor and insight to the entertaining story and characters. Fast paced action, elaborate highway chases, finely choreographed fight scenes, and impeccable dialogue make ‘Deadpool’ a treat to watch as it mixes these elements into an enjoyable film.

Tim Miller made his directorial debut, and an outstanding debut it was, with this film. Previously he has worked as an animator and visual effects artist. Rhett Reese and Paul Wernick wrote the script and it was produced by Simon Kinberg and Ryan Reynolds and executive produced by John J. Kelly and Stan Lee. It is rated R with a run time of 1 hour and 48 minutes.

 

 

 

kellym40 film review

Weighing in on ’21 Grams’

Rating 4/5

The film is an older film released in 2004 from Focus Features. It runs about two hours and five minutes. Mexican film director Alejandro Gonzalez Inarritu, most notably directing last year’s Oscar-winning film “Birdman” with Michael Keaton, takes Guillermo Arriaga’s script and tells a beautiful story with heart and style. Inarritu does so with flashbacks weaving the characters’ lives together in a climactic end. You can view the trailer below.

21 Grams

The story involves Paul Rivers (Sean Penn), who is in need of a new heart, his wife Mary Rivers (Charlotte Gainsbourg), Cristina Peck (Naomi Watts), a former drug addict and housewife, Jack Jordan (Benicio Del Toro), an ex-con who has found Jesus, and Marianne Jordan (Melissa Leo), Jack’s wife.

After a tragic accident, these lives become intertwined, building up to the climax and tells each character’s story through unique non-linear storytelling. Much like “Memento” before, flashbacks and flash forwards tell the story, which honestly, I thought was a little distracting at first but I quickly bought into the convention and let the characters and story unfold before me.

The title of the film comes from a line from Paul as he says, “They say we lose 21 grams at the exact moment of death … How much do we gain?”

I believe that line sums up the context of the film as the characters struggle with their own lives and come to terms with the life changing moment that affects all of them in the film. The story develops to hint upon what we, as people, do in our own life that can impact others. Inarritu stated that he believes all people are connected in some way. He goes on to say how one person’s actions affect another and how that person’s actions affect another and so on and so on. It is a little mind boggling to think that we are connected in some way. That our actions seem to and can have a ripple effect upon the world. I guess it can happen. And it certainly happens in this film.

Penn gives a remarkable performance as in “I Am Sam” and “Mystic River.” Through the story, he became a lost soul who was desperately trying to hang on but thought there was only one way out. Watts was believable as a former drug addict dealing with her past demons and coming to terms with her family’s death. Del Toro gives a gripping performance as a born-again Christian who is trying to find his way before the tragic event that alters the characters’ lives. Gainsbourg and Leo give heartfelt performances, as Paul and Jack’s wives respectively, and show how their lives are together changed over the course of events in the story.

21 Grams

It is a classic piece of storytelling that brings together the emotional events in the story in a way that a traditional linear structure would not. It allows the viewer to follow the characters on the emotional ride throughout the developing story and by the end the audience can be in the moment with the characters.

The film was nominated through several American and International organizations and took home 34 awards.

kellym40 film review

‘Terminator’ franchise gets a reboot, but does not compute

Rating 2.5/5

I read an article about two years ago that claimed there was talk about making a fifth installment in the sci-fi franchise. The article didn’t state at the time if this was a reboot (another sequel) or a remake of the first James Cameron directed classic. I posted an article about it at the time stating I didn’t see a need for another sequel, as “Rise of the Machines” and “Salvation” didn’t really deliver for me. And I didn’t think the original could be improved upon in any great way.

Terminator-Genisys

After viewing ‘Genisys’ my theories were correct, and there didn’t seem to be a need for this fifth installment. Don’t get me wrong. I thought it had somewhat of an interesting premise and it played with alternate timelines and took time travel to a different level (and not necessarily a good one). View the trailer below.

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi1249751321//embed?autoplay=false&width=480“>Terminator: Genisys

It begins with a narration of how the world was before Judgment Day and how it is after. This leads to a battle where the resistance attacks Skynet on the night Skynet sends back the T-800 (or Cyberdyne Systems model number 101…aka Arnold Schwarzenegger) to 1984 to kill Sarah Connor in an attempt to prohibit John Connor, the leader of the resistance, from being born. A trusted soldier and friend to John, Kyle Reese (Jai Courtney) volunteers to go back to protect her. This is where it gets a little convoluted and confusing. Without bogging you down with all the time travel and alternate timelines, I’ll just say it didn’t quite work for me. It left me with more questions than answers. And, needless to say they left the film open for possible sequels, with an end of credits scene (much like Marvel has done with their films). And I don’t know how you can really top the near masterpieces that were ‘The Terminator’ and ‘Terminator 2: Judgment Day.’

Some of the acting was decent but could have been better. Schwarzenegger was decent and delivered some of his deadpan funny lines and showed he can still create some action. I thought Courtney delivered a somewhat stiff portrayal of Kyle Reese. It was much different than the great performance Michael Biehn portrayed in 1984. Emilia Clarke played the young Sarah Connor in 1984 and played it with some strength. John Connor was portrayed by Jason Clarke and seemed to shine in the role (considering there was only one other adult John Connor played in the franchise – Christian Bale).

The film moved along at a decent pace for the action and the action, fights and chase sequences provided entertainment and some excitement. One chase/action sequence involved a speeding bus and then flipping said bus to where it crashes and ends up dangling from a bridge. The sequence was thrilling to an extent, but still lacked that Cameron-esque excitement. Then there was an insane helicopter chase through the sky and city of San Francisco. While it had its moments, it again lacked some of the action that Cameron delivered.

I don’t feel the film delivered a reason for its existence. It seemed at times they were almost disregarding the first two films and then at the same time referencing the first classic with recreations of the some of the most iconic moments and timeline from the first ‘Terminator.’

The film was released by Paramount and directed by Alan Taylor, who most recently directed the second ‘Thor’ film from Marvel. Laeta Kalogridis and Patrick Lussier wrote the script based on the characters created by Cameron and Gale Anne Hurd. It runs 126 minutes and is rated PG-13.

kellym40 film review

Jurassic World – A Return to an Original Vision

Rating 4/5

With the release of “Jurassic World,” the fourth installment in the franchise, the story takes us on an adventure at a place that was seemingly originally envisioned by John Hammond, played by the late Richard Attenborough. Released by Universal Studios and Amblin Entertainment, with direction by Colin Trevorrow, the film runs just over two hours and is perfect for some summer blockbuster action. The film is executive produced by Steven Spielberg, the man who brought us the first “Jurassic Park” in 1993. Watch the new trailer below.

http://www.imdb.com/video/imdb/vi1176612889//embed?autoplay=false&width=480

Going into the film, I was thinking, “Great, another one!” I thought shouldn’t they have learned something from the previous films? That is, not to play “God.” But I guess there are still greedy people, corporations and business that get in the way of good judgment. And I guess without those people, there would not be a movie for audiences to see.

That is part of the story in “Jurassic World.” BD Wong plays Dr. Wu, the only returning character from the original (if you don’t count the T-Rex). Wu and his team of geneticists have created a new hybrid dinosaur at the request of corporate CEO Simon Misrani, played by Irrfan Khan. However, he did not necessarily want what was produced. In order to keep the public’s interest, they wanted to create bigger, better and scarier. We learn Wu and his team have created a mixture of the T-Rex and some other animals and another secret mix of something else, (later we find out what that secret is). After the introduction of two parents sending their kids (Nick Robinson and Ty Simpkins) off for a weekend to see their aunt, who is also the operator of the park on Isla Nublar, Claire Dearing, played by Bryce Dallas Howard, we see the park in all its full functioning theme park glory, from hotels to gift shops to large exhibits and a “petting zoo” with baby dinosaurs. Soon after, we also meet the hero of the story, Owen Grady, played by Chris Pratt, who has become something like the latest new action hero, and he doesn’t disappoint in this. Grady is ex-military and is now an animal behaviorist who has “trained” a group of velociraptors. Pratt’s character is countered by a military contractor (Vincent D’Onofrio) who plans on using the raptors as weapons. A “containment anomaly” occurs and thus the action and story develop.

The film has included scenes that remind us of the original “park,” and even a showdown with the T-Rex and the new Indominus Rex. The film has no hesitation to get started and continues until the climax and resolution. We not only see Howard as a no nonsense park operator but as a thriving action heroine who is not afraid to get a little dirty and run in some hectic action sequences…IN HEELS. All of the acting was done to near perfection within the world of the film. Writer/Director Trevorrow, along with Rick Jaffa, Amanda Silver and Derek Connolly have delivered a piece that is fun, exciting, and worthy of a summer blockbuster. It has already grossed more than 400 million dollars in the two weeks it has been out. Not bad for a film that cost about 150 million to make.

I thought this film captured the essence and magic of the original “Park” with all the acting, editing, direction and special effects. Everything that went in to making this film made it a true “Jurassic World.”

kellym40 film review

The Play Within a Play: “Shakespeare in Love” film review

Rating 5/5

A film that made its United States nationwide release in 1999 went on to win numerous awards, including Oscars for best picture, best actress, best supporting actress, best writing, and best directing, among others used a useful dramatic strategy to convey the story.

The film was “Shakespeare in Love” and starred Joseph Fiennes as the bard and Gwyneth Paltrow as Viola De Lesseps, the love interest and muse for Shakespeare for the film.

For those who haven’t seen the film, there be some spoilers that follow.

The film’s opening uses two short bits to establish the time and place of the story, which is in the Elizabethan age of theater in England. The second bit provides comedy and starts the action of the film. Philip Henslowe, played magnificently by Geoffrey Rush, is a theater owner who has not paid his bills and is being tortured by Hugh Fennyman, (Tom Wilkinson) a producer and businessman.

The first scene after these bits introduces Shakespeare. Henslowe requests Will (Shakespeare) write a new play for his theater company. However, a problem is introduced in this scene as we, the audience, discover that Shakespeare has lost his gift of writing, a sort of “writer’s block.” This sets the action in motion. Will must come up with a new play to perform or it will be curtains for Henslowe’s company.

A bit that follows reveals Viola De Lesseps. She has a strong love for the theater. This is important to the story because this movie parallels the play Romeo and Juliet. She is also set to marry Lord Wessex (Colin Firth) in a few weeks. In her desire to be on the stage, she dresses as a man, Thomas Kent, (since women were not allowed to perform on stage at that time). Will becomes infatuated with Viola after a chance meeting and thus begins the love affair that would become the tragedy we have come to know.

I would say the major dramatic strategy used in this film is parallelism. Almost every scene and bit parallels the play “Romeo and Juliet,” since that is the play in which Shakespeare is trying to write, which is better than the original title “Romeo and Ethel, the Pirate’s Daughter.” The film cleverly and strategically places the story of the film in the context of writing the play, which becomes more and more of the tragic story of Romeo and Juliet as William and Viola’s romance begins to grow.

The film also does a nice job to let the viewing audience in on the film audience (groundlings and upper class), costuming, props and stagecraft of the Rose Theater during this time. The other cast members worth noting were Martin Clunes, Richard Burbage; Antony Sher, Dr. Moth; Simon Callow, Tilney, Master of the Revels; and Ben Affleck (who played a cocky but determined actor Ned Alleyn); and Dame Judy Dench portrayed the Queen.

A remarkable cast. Witty writing and acting. Impeccable directing. Brilliantly produced. The film, “Shakespeare in Love,” is wonderful entertainment. Additionally, this film has a “theatrical” sense to it (as it is about theater). In all my experience and years in academic theater, I have always enjoyed the story within the story, or the play within the play. This film had it and played it very well.

“Shakespeare in Love” was directed by John Madden, and written by Marc Norman and Tom Stoppard. It has a run time of 123 minutes and is rated R.

kellym40 film review

Face/Off: a review at “face” value

Rating 4/5

In the film “Face/Off,” directed by John Woo, the story concept centers around FBI agent Sean Archer, played by John Travolta, seems so obsessed in stopping his nemesis Castor Troy, played by Nicolas Cage, that the Travolta character “becomes” Troy in order to stop a biological bomb from detonating in the city.

This is an older film, released in 1997, but if there is anyone who hasn’t seen it then be forewarned…there are some spoilers.

MV5BMTU4MjA5NTc2NV5BMl5BanBnXkFtZTgwOTI2Mzk5MDE@._V1_SX640_SY720_

In the film’s opening, Archer is playing with his son at a carnival. In a confrontation between Archer and Troy, Archer’s young son is shot and killed. Troy is eventually caught, but is in a coma. This is really the point the sets the whole action of the film in motion.

Soon after Troy is captured, the FBI learns of a bomb threat that is set to go off somewhere in the city. A plan is devised through a breakthrough surgical procedure where the face of Troy and Archer are “swapped.” Now, Archer looks and sounds like Troy. In doing so, he hopes to infiltrate the prison where Troy’s brother, Pollux (Alessandro Nivola), is being held in order to find the location of the bomb.

Seems like a pretty simple idea. Archer discovers the location of the bomb, gets out, helps save the day, and then is reunited with his family. But as anyone knows there has to be some conflict in the story. So, while Archer is in prison “disguised” as Troy, the real Troy wakes up from his coma and gets the doctor to transplant Archer’s face on him. The procedure is complete so Troy kills the doctor and destroys all of the equipment and records that explains the operation. Now Archer is in real trouble.

All Archer wants to do is to get Troy and return to his life he had before with his wife and family. These two characters have a classic hero-villain relationship and they each play “each other” well. There is a long history with these two characters and sets up the dramatic conflict in the film well. Archer wants Troy because he killed his son and, well, because Troy’s just a bad man. Overall, the acting was decent in the film, which also brought me into the world of the story.

I found the pacing of the film to move very well, as it almost had to being an action thriller. There were some slower paced bits and sequences, but only for the needed character and story development and really didn’t detract too much from the pacing to bring me out of the story. John Woo seems to have blended all of these elements well into a watchable action film.

Other notable actors in the story were Joan Allen, who played Eve Archer (Sean’s wife) and Dominique Swain portrayed Jamie Archer, their daughter. Colm Feore was Dr. Malcom Walsh, the doctor who performed the transplant, and Gina Gershon played Sasha Hassler, Troy’s girlfriend.

I was a little hesitant at the science of the film at first, with the whole transplanting of faces and altering voices. It may have been a little far fetched at the time (late 90’s), but I quickly moved beyond that and bought into the story and action of the film. And with technology and science now, the possibilities may have been set in motion.

Obviously there are some who may have not liked this film. Others may have thought it was just horrible. I for one viewed it as entertaining action. It had interesting, varied characters, a good story, and action.

“Face/Off” was written by Mike Werb and Michael Colleary. It has a run time of 138 minutes and is rated R.